E-crime fighters share know-how

Prosecutors from around the world are to collaborate

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) is taking the lead in establishing an information network for e-crime prosecutors around the world.

The CPS, responsible for prosecuting cases brought by law enforcement agencies, claims to be one of the first such authorities to educate lawyers in how best to handle e-crime cases, and has so far trained 120 prosecutors.

Computer crimes have been difficult to prosecute in the past because lawyers have had trouble explaining technical issues to judges and juries.

Esther George of the CPS high-tech crime unit said the new venture will make a big difference.

“We are delighted to kick-start this initiative because the network will enable prosecutors worldwide to join and fight e-crime,” she said.

“It is one of the many far-sighted approaches the CPS deploys to stay one step ahead of criminals everywhere.”

But the unit should be careful not to over-sell itself, according to one law enforcement officer who has worked closely with the CPS high-tech crime team, and asked to remain anonymous.

“They were very bad when they started, but have got their act together recently,” he said. “I would not say they were leading the world.”

One example cited is the unit’s failure to anticipate the so-called “Trojan defence” used to clear at least three defendants in the past five years.

The Trojan defence involves claiming that a Trojan horse virus on a PC caused the computer to perform illegal acts, rather than the user.

Professor Peter Sommer, security expert at the London School of Economics and an expert witness in computer crime cases, said the CPS has a good core of experts, but also has weaknesses.

“You find some who know what they are doing and some who make awful mistakes,” he said.

Such mistakes include using the wrong laws to prosecute and going for ambitious charges in the hope of headline-grabbing prosecutions.

“This is exemplified by the DrinkorDie software piracy case where they went for conspiracy charges that cost £11m to prosecute. This could have been prosecuted in a different way for much less,” said Sommer.